--- David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b at dd-b.net> wrote: [...] > Quite a lot of interesting literary work has come > out of the Sherlock Holmes universe, after the > estate no longer controlled it. A lot of > literature is heavily based on Shakespeare, and > couldn't be if he were still in copyright (consider > Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead). > I think we agreed earlier that it's important things > go into the pot, and the question is *when*. As an example of particular interest, the Paarfi romances might well infringe Dumas' copyright if Dumas' works were presently in copyright under modern American copyright law. (They wouldn't have under the law at the time Dumas wrote, both because foreign works were not then covered by American copyright and because infringement was then defined much more narrowly.) There might be a viable fair use defense, though. In recent years, courts have been broadening the fair use doctrine for what are referred to as "transformative" works -- works that create new art through the innovative use of old material, including but not limited to parody. For example, a federal court of appeals ultimately reversed the preliminary injunction against the publication of "The Wind Done Gone," a case which was widely covered in the press. I think a court could go either way on the question. (I tend to agree with the complaints earlier in this discussion that the outcome of a fair use defense is difficult to predict.) That probably means that Tor, or any other publisher, would be reluctant to publish without reaching an agreement with the holder of the Dumas license -- which could involve licensing fees, or could involve surrendering some editorial control. So, yes, all of this goes to support the idea that it's important that things go into the pot, because use of the public domain generates cool stuff. -- Greg __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com